Tom,
Here are just a couple of early comments.
I have some concerns about the subjective comments in the opening
paragraphs: "Most universities..." Some disagree with this claim.
How about "Many universitites..."?
"There is an implication of factionalism." -- I disagree -- I'm not
comfortable with this sentence. I think the argument that @berkele.edu
simplifies email address is a sufficiently good reason without reaching
for other subjective claims in support of this service.
Under "Name retention" -- shouldn't we recommend a minimum length of
time that names would be retained before another can use them? I
understand that LDAP entries have a termination date some 6 months after
the individual's information is no longer in employee/student data.
Would this be the length of retention? Also, what is the intended
meaning of the term "deprecated" in this context?
The current status of the student email account policy is that all
students should have an email account (uclink or other is acceptable),
that they must provide the campus with the email address and to keep
it current in the campus online directory.
This isn't an Undergraduate Affairs proposal, but one that is coming
out of various committees -- it remains to be seen how it will resolve,
but I think you should change the bullet "Undergraduate Affairs is
considering..." to something like:
Current policy discussions are proposing that all students should have
an email account (uclink or other is acceptable) and that students must
maintain their current email address in the campus online directory.
if you think it necessary at all to include this information.
In the section under "Ongoing workload" --
I ask that you remove the phrase "... complaints about inappropriate
names." This is a non-issue now with uclink, and I wouldn't expect it
to become one with this new service -- it's not worth mentioning. Also,
I would certainly hope that UAS would *not* experience a 10-20% increase
in workload. I would put the figure at less than 5%.
Typos: unfriendlyness > unfriendliness
publicise > publicize
Thanks for pulling together a comprehensive report!
Jacqueline
>I've finished a draft of the proposal:
><http://beef.berkeley.edu/report/>.
>
>One page that needs to be added is "Signatories and possibly
>Contributors"--we can talk about that at our meeting on Monday.
>
>Do you think we need a separate "Rationale" page about why it's a good idea?
>I have some rationale on the index page; do you think we need to sell it
>more?
>
>At what point should we send the draft out to a larger group, and what
>larger group should that be?
>
>Let me know if you have any comments.
>
>--
>Tom Holub (tom_holub@LS.Berkeley.EDU, 510-642-9069)
>College of Letters & Science
>249 Campbell Hall
==================================================================
Jacqueline Craig jcraig@socrates.berkeley.edu
IST Customer Affairs Manager
235 Evans Hall
Associate Vice Chancellor's Office
Information Systems and Technology (510) 642-0334
University of California at Berkeley FAX: (510) 643-5385
==================================================================
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Feb 05 2002 - 17:29:42 PST